The USPTO Is Changing Course. The Early Examination Data Tells a More Complicated Story.

Eli Mazour is joined by Juristat’s Francesca Cruz and patent attorney Clint Mehall to look at what the examination data actually says about recent USPTO changes. The conversation moves past anecdotes to analyze how new examiner performance appraisal plan (PAP), new Section 101 guidance, and the end of the AFCP program are affecting day-to-day patent prosecution.The guests discuss a new framework for examiner seniority based on "At-Bats"—the total number of applications an examiner has handled—rather than just years at the Office. The data reveals surprising trends in office action consistency and why mid-level examiners might be more difficult than juniors. The discussion also covers the measurable decline in after-final allowances, why practitioners are defaulting to RCEs, and whether new guidance is actually moving the needle on Section 101 rejections in difficult art units.Chapters: 00:00 - Introduction03:00 - What Practitioners are Hearing: An "Incredible Year of Change"04:39 - Examiner Morale and the New Performance Appraisal Plan06:24 - Redefining Seniority: Measuring "At-Bats" vs. Tenure12:07 - Data Reveal: Junior vs. Senior Behavioral Trends15:47 - The "Confidence Gap" and Obviousness Theories18:19 - Art Unit Volatility: Why Individual Stats Matter More Than Averages22:52 - Interviews and AFCP: Addressing the USPTO "Myth-Busters"28:44 - The Shift to RCEs and the Decline of After-Final Allowances34:52 - Section 101 Trends: Has AI Guidance Changed Rejection Rates?44:47 - Final Thoughts: Preparing for Prosecution in 2026Subscribe to the Voice of IP Substack: https://voiceofip.com/📌 Presented by Tradespace – where ideas take flight.Disclaimer This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.voiceofip.com